From: João S. Lopes Filho
Message: 9045
Date: 2001-09-04
----- Original Message -----
From: Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Bog
> This is an old formation, cf. Slavic *rog-at-U 'horned' (from
> *rogU 'horn') : Lithuanian raguotas (< *rag-a:t-a-). Ct. Latin X-
> a:tus 'provided with X' (e.g. denta:tus) and similar formations
> elsewhere (also in Germanic, e.g. English horn-ed). They are not
> participles but _denominal_ adjectives. *In bog-at-U, *bogU has its
> other meaning, 'wealth, good fortune'. The Slavic word may have
> existed independently of Iranian *baga-. What was borrowed was the
> Iranian religious _meaning_ 'god'. Cf such derivatives as *ne-
> bogU 'unlucky', *u-bogU 'poor', *sU-boz^Ije 'corn, cereal'.
>
> Piotr
>
>
>
>
> --- In cybalist@..., Andrei Markine <andrey@...> wrote:
> > I would assume that 'bogaty' originally meant 'one who has gods on
> his side'
> > Compare with other adjectives with -at- and -ast- suffixes:
> > nos (nose) > nosatyi (with big nose)
> > ushi (ears) > ushastyi (with big ears)
> > glaz (eye) > glazastyi (with sharp eyes)
> > etc
> >
> > They don't look like past participles to me.
> >
> > Andrei
> >
> > At 9/4/01 08:59 AM +0000, you wrote:
> >
> > >Is Rus. <bogat-> "rich" related to that Iranian > Slavic
> <bog> "god"
> > >word? EIEC doesn't put it there. It looks like a -t past participle
> > >of a non-existent *bogati "to apportion"?
> > >
> > >Torsten
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>